forgive my ignorance but in these high speed crashes where people get tangled up in bikes...does anyone else see impending serious injury of a disc brake slicing through skin like a sharp knife?

---

@rhyspencer

If they're inboard of the forks and dropouts, then they don't seem any more dangerous than the chainring or rear sprocket. The improved and more consistent braking performance might prevent some crashes and reduce some kinds of injuries, even if the discs buzzsaw through some calves in other incidents.

---

STAC Zero Trainer - Zero noise, zero tire contact, zero moving parts. Suffer in Silence starting fall 2016

This. Twitter should prove amusing...

burns are far more likely that getting cut up. I have more than a couple of friends with the MTB rotor branding...

That is the concern I have always raised with discs on road bikes.

I have no problem with teams beginning to use discs. I do hope that does not mean that disc use becomes mandatory.

This is an important step in the evolution of braking technology for road bikes. It does not mean that it is the "right" or "best" option,minor the final stage of the development process. What the "final" step is could look substantially different than where we sit today.

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

ErnieK wrote:

burns are far more likely that getting cut up. I have more than a couple of friends with the MTB rotor branding...

Burns will only happen if the brakes have been actively used in time proximity to a crash. Brakes take time to heat up and time to cool down.

We also know that burning of skin has several grades of injury based on the temperature and time exposure to the heat source.

Where do people crash most?

• Descents: Usually not a pile up situation, a lone rider crashes himself or one other rider. Discs have the potential to be hot/warm here. Pros are braking hard into corners, but not dragging brakes for long periods so the rotors have high chance to become cool at descent speeds.
• Sprints: Large pile ups. Likely to land on your bike or another bike. Ain't no body on the brakes in a sprint. Rotors basically at ambient.
• JRA on flat in peloton: Can be a bit pileup, caused by wheel touches/road furniture. Riders usually are not actively braking in these situations but group speed is high. Rotors will be at ambient or at temperature of 2-5sec of hard braking.

I just don't see the big risk of rotors burns in road racing. The risk situation for road races is very different with regards to mountain biking.

agreed, however that also shows why disc brakes are unlikely to have a big effect on crashes.
crashes on descents may be reduced, though more likely riders will leave their braking later and so crash at higher speed.
the mass pile ups where both volume and severity of injuries are highest are unrelated to braking. road furniture, peloton size and other vehicles are the big crash causes they could try to reduce.

i have mixed feelings as i think it may be helpful for the recreational public to get discs more prominently used but i don't see it as being important or maybe even appropriate in racing at any level. and cycling is not F1 where technology really is driven by the top-level racing... though maybe it could be if the UCI really relaxed the rules, again not so sure that would be a good thing.

overall, meh i can't see it being a big thing either way - just the UCI bowing to pressure from manufacturers who want to be able to show off their new tech

This risk is easily mitigated by requiring the disk to be a certain thickness with a fully radiused outer edge. What isn't "sharp" can't "cut" you. Also, it would be a good idea to ensure all the inner edges have a generous radius.

Probably the only mechanical risk you can't mitigate well is the finger into a spinning disk problem. You could require solid discs or a limit to the size of cutouts/openings to prevent finger insertions.

I've never in my years of following bike racing have seen or heard of someone getting into a crash & having their fingers or hands get caught in the spokes of a wheel. If that is rare, hitting a disk brake in a crash will be too.

One good thing that could come of this is a standardization of axles and dropout spacing. I am intrigued by some of the disc models on the market - they wouldn't be my racing rig of choice but might be nice for a winter training or endurance bike for example. But they are all no-go until some semblance of standardization is in place such that the parts you buy aren't completely useless on another bike. That time is probably a couple years away yet.

Michele Bartoli almost had his knee cap sliced off by a four spoke Spinergy wheel.

This. This. And this.

I'm so tired of all these strawman* arguments about the dangers of "new" technology -- which, by the way, have been accepted for MTB for 15 years and have yet to cause an injury serious enough to revoke their usage.

"One rider...almost" = So should we ban the HED trispoke? It's functionally the same as the Spinergy. What about MadFiber?

Disc brakes simply are not problem. Injuries happen from riding bikes, not from parts that are manufactured and used correctly and typically.

However, when the typical physics of riding are disrupted (as in a crash), no single component is inherently more dangerous than another:

• A stem can crush your testicles
• Clipless pedals can keep you attached to the bike like a rag doll
• A saddle could rip your rectum into a dozen fleshy pieces
• A helmet strap could get wrapped around your throat and strangle you under the right conditions

The point is, we ride at a high rate of speed on an unforgiving surface. SOMETHING has got to give, and usually it's our soft, frail human body. If you can't accept the risk, get out of the sport.

Another example: Modern steel guitar strings can snap and prick my finger or, God forbid, poke my eye out -- but it's just not a prescient concern, especially because they work better for their purpose than old-school nylon and cat-gut.

*not a personal attack, Arch, it's just easier to say "you" and "me"

The UCI has been hinting around at this for something like 18 months and they are doing a limited field test, which means that they may conclude that disc brakes aren't yet appropriate for road racing. I think they are navigating the middle ground between whole sale adoption and banishment pretty well. The previous administrations of the UCI would have never had the vision or interest to let the sport adapt.

I personally don't think disc brakes for road are a big game changer but I'm also not terribly bothered by the move. All my current stuff keeps on working and it affects my life in very few ways, except to say that when some amateurs jump on the bandwagon I'll be at the ready to buy their old wheels at a bargain.

Is the use of disk brakes that much better then the traditional rim brakes? Is this technology for technology's sake?

I don't know, I've never had any problems with my boring stock brakes.

Right. If spinning objects that can cut you is a concern, then watch out for the spokes.

1) No, a Spinergy wheel is NOT functionally the same as a Spinergy wheel. Not even close.

2) Are you familiar with Bartoli's accident? The "almost" was not meant in a "whew, that was close" sense but in the "my knee cap is hanging on by a thin slice of flesh....I almost had it chopped off" He stood up and his femur pushed out from the knee. It was a serious and grotesque injury that nearly ruined his career.

Your other points re: different components causing injuries are strawmen. Saddles. stems and helmet straps are necessary pieces of equipment. Disc brakes are not. While I don't share the concerns of others re: a spinning disc, I do think it is fair to question the burn potential form rotors. I've seen guys get burned....it ain't pretty.

And I am by no means anti-disc on the road.....

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

why not just add a piece of carbon fiber over the disc to prevent burns and such? Its a road race so we dont really get that much grime in the discs :)

I have the scars on my fingers/knuckles to prove it does happen (state crit champs 2011 and wearing full finger gloves no less) and I've sewn up another guy on just a training ride. Those CX-Ray spokes are damn sharp!

---

____________________________________
Fatigue is biochemical, not biomechanical.
- Andrew Coggan, PhD

I am familiar. It was horrible. If you're volunteering to put your hand in a trispoke spinning at 35mph to show me how much different it is, I'll buy you a pair. Video posted to this thread, please.

Is the forum familiar with this from three days ago? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hRM3bFXlyNk -- maybe discs would have helped.

Or this piece of wood through a guy's leg? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dk8guSC4WFo --- I'm sure they thought the track was perfectly fit for the race.

If you look hard enough, you can find an example of any component having a catastrophic failure or contributing to a bad injury. But I'm having trouble finding widespread reports of severe burns, chopped-off fingers or career-ending injuries from bicycle disc brakes, which have been used widely in MTB for over a decade.

MAIN POINT: I believe that the relative risk is hugely overstated. Another poster in this thread nicely summarized the empirical evidence --- that there is little likelihood of all rotors being hot at the time of a multi-rider crash. In fact, a major benefit of disks is that they dissipate heat relatively quickly.

*Also, "necessary" is ALL relative because this is a hobby. Helmets weren't deemed necessary until the early 2000s, and now there are people on this very forum who will tell you that they SITLL aren't necessary. That's what I'm trying to point out -- the fact that we are all discussing/disagreeing over something selfish and expensive and totally unnecessary to life.

The UCI is a relic! Bike weight restrictions, slow adoption of new technology, etc etc. I firmly believe their restrictions have held back the manufacturers from producing some really amazing new cycling products. Look at whats been happening in the Triathlon world when manufacturers get a carte blanche. Felt IA, Scott Plasma 5, Shiv Tri just to name a few that have had amazing leaps forward for consumers. Perhaps the UCI only focus on Pros but the fact is the manufacturers need to produce the bikes for Pros to race on. The R&D spend to do an entirely new line for consumers is what has lifted the cost of bikes in recent years or is at least partially to blame.

Overall the disc brake technology is out there and the UCI needs to at least do trials rather than just write it off. To the point about burns ... I'd opt for a dip in Silicon rather than Carbon Fiber. Silicon is soft, rubberized and it prevents heat quite a bit (up to 500F). That being said I'm sure there are some kinds of draw backs to doing that. Perhaps it also keeps the heat in rather than dissipating it quickly. If regular disc brakes have worked for MTB for so long I don't see why it won't work for road cycling.

/end of rant

---

------
"Train so you have no regrets @ the finish line"

You realize that the crash was caused by rider error, right? Had very little, if anything to do with braking issues. And again, I am not arguing against the idea of discs on the road necessarily.


Another strawman. See previous post.


More strawmen. We are not talking about a "catastrophic failure". We are talking about the potential of injury as a result of normal product use. If you aren't aware of people burning themselves with disc rotors from MTB, I would suggest you aren't paying close enough attention.


perhaps.....that is what the trial period is for (among other reasons). I don't see what the problem is with raising potential issues ahead of time. (side note - the other poster's summary is NOT empirical evidence. Logical, perhaps....empirical, no.)


Still building strawmen....and helmets have been necessary since the 80's. But you cannot have a bicycle without some form of a stem system or a saddle. Nor can you race without a helmet. You can both have a bike and race without discs.

Again, I am not against road discs necessarily, but I do think they aren't really that necessary either. Gravel / Cross bikes? Sure, absolutely. Do the benefits of a disc system extend to a "oure" road or TT bike? Sure. Do those advantages outweight the negatives? Yet to be proved.

[/quote]

---

Chicago Cubs - 2016 WORLD SERIES Champions!!!!

"If ever the time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin." - Samuel Adams

Ummm...because then you'd be right back to the silliness of trying to brake on a CF surface, except now on a significantly smaller diameter surface with the proportional decrease in braking torque...not to mention the how horrible CF braking surfaces are in the wet.

No grime? Have you ever ridden through puddles or in a rainstorm?

---

http://bikeblather.blogspot.com/